Skip to content

Central Venous Pressure Change With Volume Challenge in Patients With Hemodynamic Instability

Early Change of Central Venous Pressure With Volume Challenge as Predictor of Fluid Responsiveness in Patients With Hemodynamic Instability

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01630577
Acronym
CVPCHI
Enrollment
70
Registered
2012-06-28
Start date
2012-01-31
Completion date
2013-05-31
Last updated
2016-05-05

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Acute Circulatory Failure

Keywords

acute circulatory failure, hemodynamic stability, hypovolemia

Brief summary

We conducted this study to assess the value of early change in central venous pressure (CVP) in predicting fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients.

Detailed description

In patients with shock a primary goal of treatment is to restore and maintain organ perfusion, for which an adequate cardiac preload is required. Apart from the situations in which hypovolemia is evident and a favourable response to fluid administration will be seen, clinical and biological parameters often fail to predict hypovolemia. Inappropriate use of volume expansion carries out the risk of generating volume overload and pulmonary oedema. Consequently, reliable predictors of fluid responsiveness are needed especially in the early phase of cardiocirculatory deterioration. In the clinical setting, different static and dynamic indices have been shown to be useful indicators of cardiac preload. Central venous pressure (CVP) is widely used to measure right ventricular preload in patients requiring invasive hemodynamic monitoring. However, the use of the CVP is much criticized because CVP poorly predicts cardiac preload and volume status. However several decades ago, Weil and Henning proposed the fluid challenge technique, based on the 2-5 rule using CVP. There is a method for guiding volume repletion based on measurements of the patient's response to fluid load. This method has not been validated in the prediction of fluid responsiveness. We therefore conducted a prospective study that in all patients we measured CVP change and stroke volume variation (SVV) after administration of fluids. Patients were classified as fluid responders when their SVV is \>10% after volume expansion and non-responders if SVV is ≤10%.

Interventions

OTHERvolume expansion using modified gelatin

Volume expansion using modified gelatin was determined according to a procedure formulated by modifying guidelines produced by Weil and Henning. The maximum volume infusion during the study test was fixed at 400 ml.

Sponsors

University of Monastir
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* mechanically ventilated patients * acute circulatory failure defined by the need of vasopressive drugs (dopamine \>5µg/kg/per minute or norepinephrine) with signs of tissue hypoperfusion (e.g., altered mental state, mottled skin, urine output below 0.5 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour during at least 2 h). * admission serum lactate level more than 2.5mmol/L

Exclusion criteria

* severe hypoxemia defined as a ratio of arterial oxygen pressure to fraction of inspired oxygen \[PaO2/FiO2\] \< 100 mmHg

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
fluid challange responsivenesswithin 20 minutes of fluid challengechange of Stroke volume variation (SVV) by more than 10%

Countries

Tunisia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026